click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
nominated yet simply because she went on the television and repeated what the cia was saying at the time, that was completely unsustainable. tomorrow ricks said it it right. that was completely political. the facts have shown that she wasn't lying. she was repeating what the cia had said was their best guess at that moment. it turns out to have been wrong. but to try to block her from being secretary of state simply for that was completely unsustainable and, you know, the meetings that are going to happen this week are the first step in her confirmation if the president does nominate her. i think that it would be very difficult for them to stop her. >> now, joe, they hammered ambassador rice. mccain hammered her but now he seems to be changing his tone. look at what he said then and look at what he is saying now. watch this. >> susan rice should have known better and if she didn't know better, she's not qualified. >> we will do whatever's necessary to block the nomination that's within our power as far as susan rice is concerned. if this select committee if appointed clears her of any wr
with the facts. for the first time, we saw the cia talking points on which ambassador rice based her comments on the sunday talk shows. the cia said "the currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the u.s. embassy in cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the u.s. diplomatic post in benghazi and subsequently its annex. there are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations." and, of course, that's exactly what ambassador rice told the american people. >> our current assessment is that what happened in benghazi was in fact, initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in cairo. we believe that it looks like extremist elements individuals joined in that -- in that effort. >> ambassador rice reported exactly what she was told by the cia. and testifying behind closed doors on capitol hill today, general david petraeus backed her up. looks like maverick mccain's flying solo with his fake talk express. joining me now is congressman gary ackerman, democrat
the affair that ended david petraeus' career as head of the cia. nbc reports the unraveling of the affair began as a cyber harass the probe late this spring. that's when jill kelly, a close friend of the petraeus family, reported she had received several anonymous and harassing e-mails. the e-mails referred to kelly socializing with other generals in the tampa area, suggesting it was inappropriate and should stop. and warning her to stay away from petraeus. ultimately will the fbi traced the e-mails back to petraeus' biography paula broadwell. and during the investigation, they discovered e-mails from pa tray to us broadwell that showed the two were having an extramarital affair. there's still a lot we don't know about the petraeus resignation. why would paula broadwell send threatening e-mails to jill kelley? did broadwell have access to confidential information? while there are legitimate questions that need to be answered, some on the right are back to their old tricks trying to turn this into something it's not. >> this is an administration that is practicing now serial deception. thi
learned another general has been caught up in the investigation that led to the resignation of cia director david petraeus. general john allen is the top u.s. commander in afghanistan. officials are investigating him for, quote, inappropriate communication with jill kel kelley. she's the woman that got the petraeus investigation started. the pentagon is looking at more than 20,000 pages of documents and e-mails between kelley and general allen. 20,000. officials tell the ap that some of the material was, quote, flirtatious. general allen denies having an affair with kelley, who we know was also friends with general petraeus. joining me now is michael isikoff, national investigative correspondent for nbc news. he's been breaking some of the big details on this case over the last few days. michael, first, thanks for being here tonight. >> thank you. good to be with you. >> now, let me ask, general allen is now under investigation for his relationship with jill kelley. what can you tell us about the relationship and what can you tell us about miss kelley. >> we should say we don't kno
. she said this because that's what the cia believed. that's what the cia told her with an intelligence briefing given to her that very day. yet john mccain and other republicans have launched a campaign to smear her and stop her from possibly becoming secretary of state. >> we will do whatever is necessary to block the nomination that's within our power as far as susan rice is concerned. >> i don't trust her. the reason i don't trust her is because i think she knew better and if she didn't know better she shouldn't be the voice of america. i don't think she deserves to be promoted. >> how could we place our trust in her? >> the question is how can the american people put their trust in lawmakers like these? the republicans are desperate to create a blame game here. so desperate they are actually invoking some of the great gop scandals of the past. >> somebody the other day said to me, this is as bad as water gate. nobody died in watergate. >> this is an administration that's now practicing serial deception. it's like watergate. >> the real scandal here is how republicans are trying to
nominated him as the director of the cia last year. his fall is a major challenge for the president just three days after the election and a shake-up to the security team just as he deals with the attacks in libya, tensions with iran and the end of the war in afghanistan. joining me now is nbc chief foreign correspondent richard engel, jack jacobs, an msnbc policy analyst and carl bernstein, the legendary analyst now a contributor to the daily beast. thank you all for joining me tonight. >> good to be here. >> let me start with you, be richard. this is a real shock. i mean, late this afternoon, the news came out. what can you tell us? >> what we know so far and what we've been able to confirm from multiple sources is clearly that the cia director resigned. he made that announcement and cited an extramarital affair. denot, he did not, however, say who may have been involved. what we also know from law enforcement officials is that the fbi is currently investigating paula who has written a become on general petraeus, a favorable account of general petraeus. she talks about having extensive
ambassador rice requested to try and clear the air. she went to the meetings with the acting cia director. but the republican senators were not swayed, not in the least. in fact, it sounded like they had settled on their talking points. here's what they said after the meeting. >> we are significantly troubled by many of the answers that we got and some that we didn't get. it is clear that the information that she gave the american people was incorrect. >> bottom line, i'm more disturbed more than i was before. here's what i can tell you. the american people got bad information on 16 september, they got bad information from president obama days after. it was unjustified. to give the scenario as presented by ambassador rice and president obama three weeks before an troubled today. clearly the impression that was given, of the information given to the american people was wrong. >> significantly troubled. more disturbed. their harsh words were somewhat surprising but listening to mccain you could get dizzy because just two days ago he said he would welcome a meeting with obama rice and seeme
, susan rice, was state what she was briefed on that day. >> and she was very clear. >> by the cia. >> right. and she was very clear about the ongoing uncertainty. i happen to know susan rice. i've known her for a decade. she's brilliant. so this notion that she's not qualified or she wasn't terribly bright in her remarks, it's really insulting. it's really personal. and yes, again, the man who put sarah palin -- tried to put sarah palin a heartbeat away from the presidency is questioning this woman. he also -- when he defended condi rice in 2005, there are great sound bites where he says, you know, there's nothing about the -- some of the democrats question it. there's nothing about this that isn't about revenge, that isn't about the way the election turned out, that isn't about bitterness. he's describing himself. >> and let me say that it is clear to me -- and none of us -- i don't agree with condi rice, but i would never say she wasn't bright. she's a very bright woman. and when you look at the fact that this was brought to -- matt lauer on the "today" show this morning, nbc, r
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)